This semester I finally had decided on a minor. Writing. Which basically means that if the whole psychology bit doesn't work out I have staring at my computer screen for hours wondering what to write about to fall back on. I'm pretty excited. I don't know what kind of writer I am. I did pretty well in Technical Writing and also in Creative Writing. Either way, I think if Ivana Trump can write and sell a book with the title Free to Love, I have somewhat a chance of being half way successful...and I'm okay with that.
What I am not good at is analyzing. I hate it. Which sucks considering I picked a major and minor that both analyzes everything to death. If only UCA offered degrees in watching TV marathons while eating pizza...mmm, pizza. Anyway, I had to analyze a speech based on its rhetoric. Probably the worst paper ever. Lyndon Johnson's We Shall Overcome was the speech I chose to "dig deeper". I don't want to dig deeper (yeah...I'm going to make a great therapist). The stupid paper had to be 4-5 pages long. That's shorter than my middle school kid's papers and there I was struggling to get through page 2. The question that gets me when analyzing is the question "why?".
Last semester, in American History, I had to analyze a critical article about a book. I had to analyze an article that analyzed another written work. Really? At that point, what more is there to say. I made a good grade on it, but throughout my paper the professor wrote out "why?...explain" beside all my points and observations. My answer..."uh...because...". I don't know why. My question is why do we have to over analyze everything? Why can't we just chalk it up to the writer felt like it, whatever it is he/she wrote?
Basically, I'm lazy. I'm lazy and a whole lotta selfish. I want to write my thoughts based on my own opinions or experiences. Johnson's speech was great. He wanted Civil Rights, but he actually wanted those rights carried out, not just passed through Congress and then forgotten. He was passionate and direct. He held all in America, not just us Southern folks, responsible to carry these rights out. I like Johnson. No one ever thinks of him, but he had balls. That's right. I think Johnson had balls to make a speech like that in 1965 when there was such a divide on the race issue. Unfortunately I can't make that stretch to four pages and I don't think my professor would had appreciated the whole 'he had balls' thing.
I also took Theories of Personality this semester. I never wanted to shoot myself more than I did while reading the 40 page chapter on Carl Jung. And Freud was no picnic either, but at least he has that whole sex and aggression thing to hold my attention. The whole dream analysis, and if you weren't successful at breast feeding or potty training your screwed as an adult, not to mention all the archetypes you could be from your ancestral past; ugh. Which basically means not only are you screwed to an adulthood of unhealthy relationships and horrible dreams if you had trouble breast feeding and potty training, you have to worry about your ancestors screwing you up as well. No one recovers from that.
My stance: sometimes we spend so much time digging in our past looking for answers to our problems, we forget that the answers are here in the present and then never move on. Yes, the past effects us. Yes, we should read others arguments and opinions to help form or confirm our own. Yes, we need to be able to articulate our arguments. But, more importantly we should take a closer look at where we are now and decide where we are going from here. And, also be able to decide what is REALLY important and worth looking deeper at. Not everything is worth it. And the real question shouldn't be why the writer wrote what he/she wrote; it should be why do we have an opinion about it or not have an opinion. Sometimes what doesn't move us is as telling as what does move us.
My very last paper of the semester was a ranking of all the Theorists we studied. It was ranked from least to most of how their theories will influence which type of therapy we'll use in our careers. We studied eleven of them and had to write at least a page on each of their theories. I'm a last hour type of writer. So, I get a little punchy at 2:00am towards the end of the semester. Anyway, as I got to Freud my 'screw it' spirit took over and this is what I wrote:
"The whole oral, anal, phallic, latency stages are lost on me. That’s not my interest. Maybe someone being scared to go potty when they were a kid makes them really up tight to this day, but honestly let’s get the guy a laxative and move on."
I made an A. Punchy works for me.
Analyze what I wrote and let me know what I'm really saying. It needs to be 5-6 pages long and be sure to explain your arguments. Oh...and wish me luck for Spring semester.
No comments:
Post a Comment